Share
9th November 2017
06:38pm GMT
There's not a huge difference between the finished product and the work in progress that we see Britney cultivating in her Instagram video. Frankly, I don't see any improvement whatsoever. It seems as though Brit has completed 98% of the painting before she got someone to film her, then added the finishing touches in realtime for all to see. Thus ended the work. Ne'er a paintbrush touched the canvas after that.
As an art connoisseur, I'd go so far as to say that Britney deliberately downed tools after the video was recorded. She washed her hands of that trademark painter's residue and settled into a relaxing evening of being worth $34 million. The painting probably dried overnight and was framed the next morning. Britney Spears has handed up an incomplete body of work, yet it has still sold for $10,000. Try that excuse the next time your boss tells you off for half-assing something.
What happened to the second painting?
The video clearly shows two paintings side by side. Regardless of the fact that Britney completed the painting on the left in portrait mode but it was then sold, framed and photographed in landscape, I need to know about its roommate, the equally pathetic painting on the right. It's just a bunch of paint strokes in different colours. No more, no less. C'est ça. But where the h*ck is it at this moment in time?
Did Britney decide to keep it for herself, thrilled with her accomplishment and greedy enough to deprive the world of its beauty? Did it go in the bin? Is it still propped up on that balcony to this very day? Has it also been sold, except this time not for charity *gasp* but for profit? Britney Spears has until 5pm GMT tomorrow to answer me or I will go public with whatever theory I decide. Tick tock.
Was a childlike finished product Britney's intention all along?
Was there a vision in place? I want to know Britney's inner workings here. Did she set out to create something that was simplistic with a childlike playfulness edge? In which case, she has completely nailed the brief and I have been incredibly harsh thus far. Maybe we've been looking at it all wrong. Sometimes complexity can cloud the accessibility of something to those less proficient in the artwork community. Was Britney's painting a bold statement on the bullshit world of modern art?
But on the other hand, maybe Britney was trying really hard, and we can't exactly fault her for that. It's important to always try your best, Nietzsche said that (probably). Either way, the finished product needs to be held to the same standard as we would any other piece of artwork. Rothko's paintings are all quite simple in terms of technical ability, yet they've sold for tens of millions of dollars. Is Britney Spears the new Rothko? I'm inclined to believe so.
Will the painting increase in value when Britney dies?
Obviously Britney Spears will never die because hers is an essence that will live on forever, but it would be foolish to omit the occurrences of the past. Historically, paintings grow in value when the artist passes away. Van Gogh made very little money from his artwork when he was alive, but once he died, that paper really started to roll in. It's a frustrating conclusion that all artists have to come to terms with and one which Britney is most likely aware of.
Considering this thing sold for $10,000 and Britney is still very much alive and kicking, I am predicting a huge swell in value when she dies. At this point, were I a real journalist, I would enlist the help of an art evaluator to project that increase in value, but I'm not, so I'll just guess that it will be worth ten times that amount for every year after her passing. The purchaser has made a smart investment and although we may berate his choices today, he will truly have the last laugh if he outlives Ms. Spears.
Did the purchaser buy it because he wanted to donate money or because he legitimately liked the painting?
I've learned that this man is called Robin Leach and he used to present a show called 'Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous'. He's clearly a man that is very much clued into the lifestyles of those that are both rich and indeed famous, so I find it hard to believe that he bought this painting out of admiration for the workmanship that has gone into it. Robin's expression in the above photograph may come back to haunt us all when the painting is hung at the MoMA in years to come and revered by millions worldwide as The Most Beautiful Painting Of 2017.
Alternatively, he's just a very generous man that wanted to donate $10,000 to a very worthy cause and was happy to receive a small token of Britney's gratitude in the process. It's like when you put a few coins in one of those charity buckets in town and you get a badge of sticker as a thank you, except this is on a much larger scale. Robin Leach is a good, nay, a great man and now the proud owner of a Britney Bitch original.
Is the painting ahead of its time and I am simply too stupid to recognise its beauty?
I've ragged on this painting quite a bit on the preceding 994 words and am not too proud to admit that perhaps it is I who is missing the mark here. Maybe my eyes are deceiving me and that painting is as expressive and affecting as Monet's 'Water Lilies' masterpiece. It's the same concept, trying to evoke the beauty and simplicity of flowers on canvas using paint, water and a paintbrush, so does the end result even truly matter?
Britney Spears has it all. She can sing, she can dance, she can certainly give acting her best shot. So why would any of us begrudge her the chance at being an artist as well? Humans are complex beings, our talents know no bounds. With the right amount of heart, determination and enthusiasm, we can achieve anything. Look beyond the painting that could well have been executed by a toddler. Look into your soul. Is that a piece of artwork? Yes. That is art. Britney Spears has unlocked her art badge and you know what, I'm proud of her.Explore more on these topics:
